@Yakamoto: Are you kidding me?
He linked to "Confirmation Bias" and had nothing else to contribute to the discussion. So.. My answer to you is:
I find it a very poor way of proving your point and making you appear credible if you counteract someone's statement by simply calling it confirmation bias.
Touché, but it was a decently valid point as opposed to calling his statement denial.
I understand what you mean by that however, and I do agree with you. A simple link isn't really enough.
I linked to confirmation bias without further discussion because numerology, and the constant denial of its failure to predict anything with accuracy, is best explained by confirmation bias. Numerology cherry picks past examples and makes them fit baseless statements and then says, "See, it all fits into this mysterious pattern!" It's pseudo-science, not based on empirical evidence, and sidesteps rational logic. It can be explained, however, by the human tendency to only focus on data that fits into a predetermined belief (confirmation bias), and the strong human drive to draw conclusions from patterns, even when those conclusions are not based on empirical data or tested with the scientific method.
I could actually spend a good amount of time backing up my above statements, but I don't need to waste my time, you've already proven my point with your failure to predict the future with absolute certainty:
And here, my other thread that shows you, beyond any doubt, that the date of 22/7 or somewhere around there is decided long time ago. I am now predicting the history books will choose the date of 25/7/2014 however, since that will be a 7/7/7.
Hmm, where's the economic collapse that is
beyond any doubt supposed to happen by 7/25?
